Im not sure if this belongs in the bad or good movies section, but i just wanted to talk about it cuz it looks super-rad. I havent even seen the first one, actually, but Ive heard nothing but good things about it. Ill probobly go watch it before i see 28 WEEKS. Add this one to the list of amazing cinima of 2007 along with grindhouse, 300, spiderman 3, my name is Bruce, and many others.

I saw it yesterday, and I thought it was a mixed bag. Visually, it's shaky-cam in all its glory, but it is an overall improvement over the first film. I like the way Fresnadillo (the director) plays with claustrophobia in the prologue (the open spaces are more claustrophobic than the interiors), or how he mixes idillic with nightmarish imagery in the same scenes. Other scenes are also keepers, like the excursion to the post-apocalyptic GB.

But it's all an empty shell. "28 days later" felt like an un-official "The day of the Triffids" adaptation, and it made it a far better movie than one could expect. Plus it had some real funny puns on the aislacionism of the British. But here all we have is some American bashing (it starts to feel tired this days) and a plot that runs out of steam after the script churns out its only decent idea, that all it takes for new catastrophe to unphold is some human emotions running amok. Since then, it's all chases, some scares and little else. It doesn't help matters that the characters we should care about are either too generic (the American troops) or too underdeveloped, or that the dialogue is just plain bad.

So, I'd give the movie a C, but I hope that if they keep doing sequels next time they wait until they have something interesting to say.

Logged

Due to the horrifying nature of this film, no one will be admitted to the theatre.